Behaviour and welfare: the visitor effect in captive felids

Abstract

The influence of visitors on the welfare of captive animals, known as the visitor effect, may in some instances be stressful, adversely affecting animal health. Although the survival of many felid species depends on captive breeding programmes, little is known about this effect. A better understanding of the visitor effect is required to ensure the well-being of felids and the success of breeding programmes. We sought to determine whether the presence of visitors affects behaviour patterns and space use in five feline species in two Spanish zoos: Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx), jaguar (Panthera onca), bobcat (Lynx rufus), ocelot (Leopardus pardalis) and Asiatic lion (Panthera leo persica) and, if so, whether the effect on animal welfare is positive or negative. To our knowledge, no previous research has addressed the visitor effect in these species, with the exception of the jaguar. Data on animal behaviour, enclosure use, and visitor density were collected during the spring and summer of 2011 and 2012. Changes were observed for all studied species when the zoo was open to the public: four species devoted less time to complex behaviour (ie play, walk) and spent more time resting; ocelots and bobcats made more use of hidden spaces and less use of areas closer to visitors, while the jaguar tended to do the opposite. No correlation was found between visitor density and animal activity, indicating that animals are affected by the mere presence of visitors, regardless of their number. Our findings are in line with those reported by other authors, who have suggested that these behavioural changes are linked to chronic stress. Visitor effect was classed as negative for the welfare of all studied species apart from the jaguar. We advocate the need for future research into potential solutions to mitigate the adverse effect of visitors on felids.

The Visitor Effect on Zoo Animals: Implications and Opportunities for Zoo Animal Welfare

“…Higher noise levels also increased self-scratching behaviour in two individuals. One male showed an increase in aggressive ‘open mouth’ and ‘teeth display’ in response to the increased group size and noise level.[55] Carnivora Brown bearPresence vs. absenceBehaviourThe presence of visitors was associated with greater levels of stereotypies, locomotion, vigilance and increased use of the back part of the enclosure.[95]CheetahNumber and noiseBehaviourNo difference in cheetah behaviour was detected in response to visitor number.[101]Clouded leopardPresence vs. absenceGCsHigher GC concentrations in animals housed on display versus off display.[40]Eurasian lynx, ocelot, bobcat, jaguar, Asiatic lionPresence vs. absenceBehaviourConducted at two sites: when visitors were present (zoo open), ocelots, lynx, bobcat and lions showed a decrease in activity and an increase in time spent further away from visitor areas, but the jaguar showed the opposite response.[161]Fennec foxNumberBehaviourHigher number of visitors was correlated with increased frequency of stereotypic running.[35]Giant pandaPresence vs. absenceBehaviourPresence of visitors was associated with greater levels of exploration, feeding and time spent not visible. Pandas also showed an increase in use of the back part of the enclosure when visitors were present.[95]Harbour seal…”

Widespread Behavioral Responses by Mammals and Fish to Zoo Visitors Highlight Differences between Individual Animals

“…uncia ), clouded leopard ( Neofelis nebulosi ), and fishing cat ( Felis viverrinus ). However, Suárez et al [ 32 ] noted behavioral differences based on the presence or absence of zoo visitors in five felid species: Eurasian lynx ( Lynx lynx ), jaguar ( P. onca ), bobcat ( L. rufus ), ocelot ( Leopardus pardalis ), and Asiatic lion ( P. l. persica ). A separate study of jaguars found that visitor density and noise level impacted the amount of time the cats spent visible and the male’s level of aggression, while visitor noise levels were associated with increased pacing by the female [ 33 ].…”

Zoo foraging ecology: Preference and welfare assessment of two okapi (Okapia johnstoni) at the Brookfield Zoo.

“…Unlike the female, however, the majority of food patches with the highest GUDs were located either along the visitor area or toward the back of the exhibit. Previous studies suggest that visitor proximity may negatively impact zoo animal behavior and welfare (see Davey, 2007 for a review ;Quadros, Goulart, Passos, Vecci, & Young, 2014;Suárez, Recuerda, & Arias-de-Reyna, 2017); it is therefore possible that the male okapi was more sensitive and possibly threatened by the proximity of human visitors compared to the female. This idea could be tested further by adding additional visual barriers or canopy cover along the exhibit barrier between the visitors and the okapi.…”